Legal Opinion
Lugash v. Santa Anita Manufacturing Corp.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided April 2, 1965No. 62-757-ECPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CRARY, District Judge.
This case involves the validity, infringement and misuse of patents covering “load elevator for motor trucks” and hydraulic hoist for vehicles. The Letters Patent in question are Lugash Patent No. 2,837,227, filed April 15, 1957, and issued June 3, 1958, and Lugash Patent No. 2,989,196, filed September 27, 1957, and issued June 20, 1961.
The construction of the device in Patent 2,837,227 includes a device that is attached to the chassis of a truck and by a parallel linkage system moves loads on an approximately horizontal platform between ground level and the level of the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Lincoln Engineering Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Zippo Manufacturing Company v. Rogers Imports, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1963
- Patterson-Ballagh Corp. v. MossCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
- Ottumwa Box Car Loader Co. v. Christy Box Car Loader Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1914
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Mayview Corp. v. RodsteinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Engelhard Industries, Inc. v. Sel-Rex CorporationDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1966
- Mayview Corp., an Illinois Corporation v. Harvey B. Rodstein, an Individual and Rodac Pneumatic Tools, Inc., a California Corporation, and Rodac International Corporation, a California Corporation, Harvey B. Rodstein, an Individual, and Rodac Pneumatic Tools, Inc., a California Corporation, and Rodac International Corporation, a California Corporation, Counterplaintiffs-Appellants v. Mayview Corp., an Illinois Corporation, Leonard Shapiro, Irving Fisher, Tom Sato and Shig Nakagiri, Individuals, Astrosound, a Corporation, Astrosound, a Division of Marquette Appliance Co., a Corporation, Marquette Appliances Co., a Corporation, Autoquip Distributors, Western Skills, General Merchandising Co., Counterdefendants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980